Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/337883
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 29 JUNE 2014 Opinion 19 imprisoned while internationally wanted drug traffickers are let off the hook. (Later, thanks to the Josette Bickle case, we also got to discover that drugs were arguably more available inside prison than outside. So much for prison as a 'deterrent'…) Jason Azzopardi seems to be entirely unaware that these and other disasters have resulted in a shift in the focus of the entire debate. It is no longer about which crop of politicians makes the most noise to drum up popular sentiments one way or another. It is no longer the case that whoever shouts 'Barunijiet tad-droga' the loudest automatically wins the game. It is now about the recognition that 'the game' has in fact been lost by all parties concerned, and the rules need to be redevised from scratch. And this is where all parliamentarians contributing to this debate have consistently missed the point about drug policy reform. This same realisation also forces us to confront the actual underlying principle of the matter, which has been ignored for decades. People are now asking questions such as: what constitutes criminal behaviour, anyway? Why does the law exist? Why should it perceive recreational drugs so harshly, while other equally harmful substances are not only tolerated but promoted? To what precise extent can or should the State intervene in the private health decisions of individuals? And above all: given the evident failure of past policies to even contain the problems that we all know exist … what new policies should we be thinking up to address the same problems? A far cry, I think you'll agree, from the questions currently being raised in parliament. Will you walk the walk? Will you talk the talk? (Note: I am tempted to add: "and will you just shut the **** up?"… but I guess that would be rude.) Meanwhile, in other news, the OASI Foundation – which provides rehabilitation programmes for drug dependency problems – organised a national conference on this very subject in Gozo last Thursday. I've already mentioned Franco Debono among the speakers – and obviously he was there to give a purely legal perspective. To be honest (no offence or anything) I was more interested in other dimensions on this occasion. So I listened more to the drug addicts who spoke from the floor, and the people who work with them in rehab… not to mention individual experts such as Dr Mario Mifsud, the head of forensics and court- appointed expert on drugs; Dr Anthony Grech, who has conducted research into the neurological effects of cannabis, etc. All had a chance to get a word in, and I need hardly add that the tone and flavour of the debate were literally light years from the schoolyard antics displayed by others on the same issue. What struck me about the whole discussion (oh, I forgot to mention that I was on one of the panels myself – yes, strangely they seemed to think I could contribute… but as I've already written all I had to say in the debate, I won't waste time repeating it here) was the unexpected level of consensus that has suddenly emerged on the subject of drug use as a criminal offence. There may have been divergences on the detail, but there was clear unanimity among all interventions on at least one point: that drug users should not be imprisoned… at least, not specifically for the act of taking drugs. Considering that some of the people who spoke evidently had strong reservations about decriminalisation as a policy (one social worker, for instance, argued against even a classification system on the basis that 'there is no such thing as 'hard' or 'soft' drugs), there was not a single, solitary voice defending a criminal justice system that responds to drug use in the same way as it would to a serious crime against the person: theft, bodily harm, attempted murder, and so on. In brief, it was as though the multiple layers of hysterical nonsense that had accumulated around this issue were peeled away once and for all, so that we could all concentrate on the aspects of this reform that actually matter. If drugs are to be regulated at law, it follows that (for starters) one must first distinguish between problematic drug use and non- problematic use; and if problem drug users are regarded by society (and also by all world health authorities, including the United Nations) as sick people in need of medical assistance, then it follows that they should not also face criminal sanctions for their condition. By the same token, if the consumption of drugs in some cases is not associated with any problem at all, then it is manifestly illogical and unjust to treat it as a criminal offence. Admittedly, not everyone necessarily agreed on that second point: but on the first, at least, there was overwhelming consensus. And that, to me, is a darn good foundation on which to build a functional and just drug policy. But of course, the ones who will actually devise this policy are still banging their shoes on their parliamentary desks, and accusing each other of 'posturing on the political stage'. Call me a pessimist, but this does not exactly fill me with optimism for a more reasonable drug policy this time round… Reforming drug laws is not a game There was clear unanimity among all interventions on at least one point... that drug users should not be imprisoned